PDA

View Full Version : WSU advances to E8



tyra
03-28-2013, 08:37 PM
Fluke? Or maybe this team is just on a roll. Saturday will tell.

gonwick
03-28-2013, 08:40 PM
I'm not sure beating lasalle counts as being on a roll. Gu lost its golden opportunity. Like you said, maybe they will beat Ohio state and prove themselves. It might make me feel better, like when unc won it all after pasting us.

MJ777
03-28-2013, 08:43 PM
Fluke? Or maybe this team is just on a roll. Saturday will tell.

I think the Buckeyes will win, but what do I know? My bracket is on fire and not in a good way.

GeorgiaZagFan
03-28-2013, 08:50 PM
Should have been the Zags :(:mecry:

MickMick
03-28-2013, 09:04 PM
We all know that the best path is the #1 seed path.

TexasZagFan
03-29-2013, 04:53 AM
I think the Buckeyes will win, but what do I know? My bracket is on fire and not in a good way.

Here's a photo of my bracket:

http://www.michaeljohngrist.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/nuclear%20explosions/marshall%20islands%20nuclear%20fallout27.jpg

It's been that way for six years now...I always use my heart when filling it out. :argh:

ZenZag
03-29-2013, 05:54 AM
Ohio St will mop the floor with the Shockers. They had an anomaly of a game against us and I thought they beat LaSalle, not because they looked so dominant, but because LaSalle looked lifeless. Ohio St. is the end of the road for for WSU.

McZag
03-29-2013, 06:37 AM
Wow still so much doom and gloom. They beat LaSalle handily - not a close game or buzzer beater finish.

How would you feel if LaSalle had held them to 30% shooting behind the arc? Cheer up folks. The Shockers are playing well enough to advance and that's all that matters. Good for them.

LongIslandZagFan
03-29-2013, 07:15 AM
Here's a photo of my bracket:

http://www.michaeljohngrist.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/nuclear%20explosions/marshall%20islands%20nuclear%20fallout27.jpg

It's been that way for six years now...I always use my heart when filling it out. :argh:


Wow... Eerily similar to mine.

jazzdelmar
03-29-2013, 07:21 AM
Wich was 5-12 from three v Lasalle. Sic transit.......

23dpg
03-29-2013, 08:24 AM
I have nothing for or against Wichita State. My interest in the tourney took a nose dive last Saturday.

This was Gonzaga's best chance to make a deep run. It still burns a little for me.

It might end up that GU's real best shot comes when no one else is giving them much of one.

To next year.

titopoet
03-29-2013, 08:26 AM
Here's a photo of my bracket:

http://www.michaeljohngrist.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/nuclear%20explosions/marshall%20islands%20nuclear%20fallout27.jpg

It's been that way for six years now...I always use my heart when filling it out. :argh:

Wow, I am jealous. That looks a whole lot better than mine.

thickman1
03-29-2013, 10:06 AM
The thing about the WSU vs. LaSalle game that was interesting to me was how the Shockers played an almost completely different style. Against us it was bombs away from 3-land; against LaSalle it was pound it inside and hurt the Explorers in the paint. Great coaching adjustment from game to game.

Hoopaholic
03-29-2013, 10:18 AM
We shut down their inside game. We outrebounded them....they outrebounded LaSalle almost 2 to 1.....their second chance points were limited to almost none against us and had 16 against LaSalle...
they attacked off the dribble against us with no success, they attacked off the dribble against LaSalle almost at will

If you cant win the rebounds, cant attack off the dribble for success and cant have an inside game.....what is left to do....throw up three balls and hope they go in...they did just that against us.....

I guess some will say we should have let them attack easier off the dribble? let them have easier shots in the paint????

bballbeachbum
03-29-2013, 10:24 AM
We shut down their inside game. We outrebounded them....they outrebounded LaSalle almost 2 to 1.....their second chance points were limited to almost none against us and had 16 against LaSalle...
they attacked off the dribble against us with no success, they attacked off the dribble against LaSalle almost at will

If you cant win the rebounds, cant attack off the dribble for success and cant have an inside game.....what is left to do....throw up three balls and hope they go in...they did just that against us.....

I guess some will say we should have let them attack easier off the dribble? let them have easier shots in the paint????

some will say we should have kept running them off the 3 point line in the second half after the first half happened, which GU did when playing well in the 2nd half, and then didn't later in the half for whatever reason. the gameplan made sense, the adjustments made sense, but the execution down the stretch on the D adjusments waned imo, for whatever reasons

spike_jr
03-29-2013, 10:28 AM
I guess some will say we should have let them attack easier off the dribble? let them have easier shots in the paint????

Yes we should have. It's called an in game adjustment. We had an advantage down low and no foul trouble. The only way they were going to beat us was from the outside.

Hoopaholic
03-29-2013, 10:29 AM
correct.....Sean Miller I thought put it well last night when he said that we practice the switch a tthe end of the game defensive alignment everyday in practice and the young man simply didnt execute.

That happens in college basketball.

The other example was Craft talking on video about how the team rally's around a player on the court when that particular player does not follow the coaches gameplan.....

Kids forget, deviate or fail to make their assignements .....that is the beauty of college basketball for me.....

those who rant and rave that the coach should have done this or implemented that...either discount that players make errors or they have a bone to chip

Hoopaholic
03-29-2013, 10:33 AM
so Spike tell me how you would have implemented "run them off the three point line"??

And what would you have done if hard push to dribble attack was funneled and that put KO and Harris in foul trouble or fouled out

We were up by 7 or 8....they hit 7 threes in a row of those 7 3 were what I consider defensive errors (one close out with hands down, one hedge for help that was too deep and could not recover to close out on shooter, and one where the defender was too deep in help side and a quick pass over top we could not close out), the other 4 were shots that were defended and were simply made shots

former1dog
03-29-2013, 10:43 AM
those who rant and rave that the coach should have done this or implemented that...either discount that players make errors or they have a bone to chip

The problem with the logic you're applying is that it ignores similar results from past seasons with different players. The constant factor is the coach.

I've already said that Coach Few is the coach for me. I don't want anyone else. BUT, I do want Coach Few to get over this hump.

For years, those that were paying attention could see that Gonzaga didn't defend the 3 very well. In fact, I think its Primal who recently posted that the last 5 or better defeats for Gonzaga in the tournament came as a result of double digits 3's being made against our team. An adjustment should be made.

And don't give me that crap about being a spoiled fan. I've been around here and around Gonzaga a long damn time (25 years!) I'm entitled to an informed opinion.

That is all.

bballbeachbum
03-29-2013, 10:56 AM
For years, those that were paying attention could see that Gonzaga didn't defend the 3 very well. In fact, I think its Primal who recently posted that the last 5 or better defeats for Gonzaga in the tournament came as a result of double digits 3's being made against our team. An adjustment should be made.

Yes, which is why the GBj injury sucked so bad. He's a big part of why this GU team actually did much better in this regard and why I thought they could succeed, because he can get after that perimeter and help provide the balance. Then he wasn't available and it showed imo. It's not an excuse, WSU still made 7 3s in a row, hats off to them sincerely, but just talking about GBj and his impact on this

former1dog
03-29-2013, 11:11 AM
Yes, which is why the GBj injury sucked so bad. He's a big part of why this GU team actually did much better in this regard and why I thought they could succeed, because he can get after that perimeter and help provide the balance. Then he wasn't available and it showed imo. It's not an excuse, WSU still made 7 3s in a row, hats off to them sincerely, but just talking about GBj and his impact on this

I agree that Gary Bell Jr. could have made an impact, BUT it should be noted that Wichita made 7 three pointers in the first half of that game also. And we all also know that Southern made 10 3's versus GU in the previous game and nearly pulled off the upset.

bballbeachbum
03-29-2013, 11:25 AM
I agree that Gary Bell Jr. could have made an impact, BUT it should be noted that Wichita made 7 three pointers in the first half of that game also. And we all also know that Southern made 10 3's versus GU in the previous game and nearly pulled off the upset.

Good points. I'm agreeing with you basically. This 3 point thing is an ongoing sore.......

just a bummer to have our top perimeter defender unable to answer the bell when so needed. Who knows tho, they may have drained 7 straight anyway

former1dog
03-29-2013, 11:35 AM
Last game of the season for GU:

2013 WSU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2012 OHST shoots 38% from 3, making 9
2011 BYU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2010 Syracuse shoots 48% from 3, making 12
2009 UNC shoots 58% from 3, making 11
2008 Davidson shoots 50% from 3, making 11

bballbeachbum
03-29-2013, 11:40 AM
Last game of the season for GU:

2013 WSU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2012 OHST shoots 38% from 3, making 9
2011 BYU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2010 Syracuse shoots 48% from 3, making 12
2009 UNC shoots 58% from 3, making 11
2008 Davidson shoots 50% from 3, making 11

ouch

sore, ongoing

Unbiased
03-29-2013, 11:43 AM
The problem with the logic you're applying is that it ignores similar results from past seasons with different players. The constant factor is the coach.

For years, those that were paying attention could see that Gonzaga didn't defend the 3 very well. In fact, I think its Primal who recently posted that the last 5 or better defeats for Gonzaga in the tournament came as a result of double digits 3's being made against our team. An adjustment should be made.


With five minutes to go, The Zags had a seven point lead. Inexplicably, for whatever reason, the players, not Few decided to put the game on cruise control and a series of unfortunate events occurred: lazy rushes to the three point line allowing wide open threes, players bumping into each other while not screaming "pick" which led to two free throws, slow motion rotation to the weak side, an attempted half court lob pass to Olynk with three defenders fronting him, and then the ultimate - the bonehead violation throw in.

I feel for Coach Few and his staff. This was a tough loss that should never have happened.

webspinnre
03-29-2013, 11:48 AM
Last game of the season for GU:

2013 WSU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2012 OHST shoots 38% from 3, making 9
2011 BYU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2010 Syracuse shoots 48% from 3, making 12
2009 UNC shoots 58% from 3, making 11
2008 Davidson shoots 50% from 3, making 11

Statistically, this is a perfect example of selection basis. Obviously we're going to be much more likely to lose when our opponent makes a bunch of 3s. As we've discussed in numerous threads here, 3s are streaky/random, and research suggests that defense has minimal impact on % of makes. Thus, when a team is hot from 3, it would be only logical that they're more likely to win than when they aren't. If you really want to do some statistical analysis, we're much better looking at overall trends, either just tourney games, or all games (or based on top 100 RPI, or whatever). My suspicion is that you'll find both for GU and for other teams a fairly solid correlation between opponent 3 point shooting % and opponent winning percentage.

Hoopaholic
03-29-2013, 11:58 AM
Please Explain what the coaching plan was and what the coaches general philosophy is regarding defense (I can guess but I do not know)...Also please tell me what your game plan would have been for Wichita State?


You can either be ultra aggressive belly up and force the dribble drive, play straight up on the catch arm length, play straight up arm length on the catch with a shade off to the strong or predominate hand, or you can drop off and dare on the catch, drop off and prepare for the drive on the catch

----then you need to decide what you are going to do with strong side and weakside help....are you going to hedge and recover, sag and help, rotate top side down, rotate weakside over, rotate strong side up...if you are hedge and recover how much hedge and recover ..if you are coming strong or weakside help how far off...two steps off the man 1 pass away, 3 steps off ..mid paint---hold direct line or up the line when sagging.....

-----then you need to decide what your rotation will be..will it be strong side down, weakside down, weakside across, cross rotation.....does your point man on defense get involved in the rotation or does he hold for fastbreak options

Please tell me what the coaching strategy was....

Please tell me what our coaching strategy is it applied across the board or adjusting to individual teams and specific individals on the court

do you make any of these adjustments at time outs, halftime ect?

I have not even begun to find out what the strategy would be regarding on ball screen, off ball screen, back picks strong side, back pick weak side, cross screen defensive actions, nor have we discussed post defense


I honestly doubt anyone knows what the coaching strategy is, but you can also tell how CONSISTENT approach generally wins out over the long run versus trying to chang ephilosophy mid stream every time you have a hiccup

former1dog
03-29-2013, 12:04 PM
With five minutes to go, The Zags had a seven point lead. Inexplicably, for whatever reason, the players, not Few decided to put the game on cruise control and a series of unfortunate events occurred: lazy rushes to the three point line allowing wide open threes, players bumping into each other while not screaming "pick" which led to two free throws, slow motion rotation to the weak side, an attempted half court lob pass to Olynk with three defenders fronting him, and then the ultimate - the bonehead violation throw in.

I feel for Coach Few and his staff. This was a tough loss that should never have happened.

Yeah, I might be with you if not for the glaring and consistent issue with 3 point defense, demonstrated in my previous post.

bballbeachbum
03-29-2013, 12:08 PM
Statistically, this is a perfect example of selection basis. Obviously we're going to be much more likely to lose when our opponent makes a bunch of 3s. As we've discussed in numerous threads here, 3s are streaky/random, and research suggests that defense has minimal impact on % of makes. Thus, when a team is hot from 3, it would be only logical that they're more likely to win than when they aren't. If you really want to do some statistical analysis, we're much better looking at overall trends, either just tourney games, or all games (or based on top 100 RPI, or whatever). My suspicion is that you'll find both for GU and for other teams a fairly solid correlation between opponent 3 point shooting % and opponent winning percentage.

a different thought on this is that it demonstrates the value of being able to shoot it out with teams and make open shots when the other team's guys are hitting. Make more and be more efficient at it than they are, maybe that's a better way to view it? games do happen when other teams make shots and making open shots in response can help to slow that down in its own way. Just like the Zags, I think, maybe felt a little pressure in the 1st half when all those 3s were hitting against them and didn't shoot or play as well, I think it's harder maybe for WSU to keep ripping away when the response is to make plays and open shots

always hear about teams that defend so well and its the cornerstone because you're always in the game that way, which is true. But for the Zags it's offensive execution that drives all the rest seems to me, even considering as far as they have come defensively

anyway, I'm done know. after finally watching the game last night for the first time, seems I needed a little time on the couch today to help me process things :)

former1dog
03-29-2013, 12:09 PM
Statistically, this is a perfect example of selection basis. Obviously we're going to be much more likely to lose when our opponent makes a bunch of 3s. As we've discussed in numerous threads here, 3s are streaky/random, and research suggests that defense has minimal impact on % of makes. Thus, when a team is hot from 3, it would be only logical that they're more likely to win than when they aren't. If you really want to do some statistical analysis, we're much better looking at overall trends, either just tourney games, or all games (or based on top 100 RPI, or whatever). My suspicion is that you'll find both for GU and for other teams a fairly solid correlation between opponent 3 point shooting % and opponent winning percentage.

I'm not going to go deeper into statistical analysis and I'm not going to present my game plan.

The point is that Gonzaga has been particularly vulnerable to individual players or whole teams performing at better than they normally do from 3 point land. Anyone that has been following Gonzaga hoops for the last 10 years could tell you this. If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and moves like a duck, it sure as hell ain't a bear.

If you all want to ignore that pimple on our cheek, its fine with me. I enjoy the hell out of our team and I'll continue to do so. Realizing that Coach Few has a little problem that he has to adjust doesn't change that for me, even though it is a source of frustration.

Good day and Happy Easter!

Hoopaholic
03-29-2013, 12:23 PM
so because of a perceived pimple, the parents of the beauty queen wants her to go through reconstructive surgery....hmmmm makes sense to me

former1dog
03-29-2013, 12:27 PM
so because of a perceived pimple, the parents of the beauty queen wants her to go through reconstructive surgery....hmmmm makes sense to me

Do you equate making the defensive adjustment to better defend or better yet discourage the 3 point shot to reconstructive surgery? I sure don't.

Seriously, don't be so thin skinned. If it ain't broke, don't fix it is a good plan. But, if its a little bit broken, bring it in for a tune up. Put some air in the tires for cryin' out loud.

Sometimes some of guys remind me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TtGQnyPZ6g

maynard g krebs
03-29-2013, 12:29 PM
Statistically, this is a perfect example of selection basis. Obviously we're going to be much more likely to lose when our opponent makes a bunch of 3s. As we've discussed in numerous threads here, 3s are streaky/random, and research suggests that defense has minimal impact on % of makes. Thus, when a team is hot from 3, it would be only logical that they're more likely to win than when they aren't. If you really want to do some statistical analysis, we're much better looking at overall trends, either just tourney games, or all games (or based on top 100 RPI, or whatever). My suspicion is that you'll find both for GU and for other teams a fairly solid correlation between opponent 3 point shooting % and opponent winning percentage.

Wow, logic. What a novel approach!

Unbiased
03-29-2013, 12:30 PM
Yeah, I might be with you if not for the glaring and consistent issue with 3 point defense, demonstrated in my previous post.

That is an issue - you get no disagreement from me.

webspinnre
03-29-2013, 12:33 PM
The point is that Gonzaga has been particularly vulnerable to individual players or whole teams performing at better than they normally do from 3 point land. Anyone that has been following Gonzaga hoops for the last 10 years could tell you this. If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and moves like a duck, it sure as hell ain't a bear.

If you all want to ignore that pimple on our cheek, its fine with me. I enjoy the hell out of our team and I'll continue to do so. Realizing that Coach Few has a little problem that he has to adjust doesn't change that for me, even though it is a source of frustration.


That isn't at all what I said. I'm not trying to at all to pretend it doesn't matter or isn't important. What I'm trying to say is that we need to look at this problem in its proper context. The point is that it isn't Coach Few doing something right when the other team doesn't make 3s, and doing something wrong when they do make 3s. Coach Few appears to have deliberately chosen a strategy of allowing a higher than normal amount of attempted 3s, and from the perspective of winning the highest percentage of games possible, this is likely the correct strategy (as evidenced by his overall winning pct). The downside is that this is a high variance strategy, and it leaves you prone to "upsets" when the other team is shooting particularly well. As such, this strategy may not be the best strategy when it comes to something like the NCAA tournament when you're knocked out with a single loss, while it's an excellent strategy to be done over the course of 30 some odd games (larger sample size = reduced variance due to luck/randomness).

SteelZag
03-29-2013, 12:35 PM
would be our offense the last 5 years in getting eliminated. An average of 41% as posted in another thread is dismal. Some might say continually missing bunnies is on the players. Maybe the bunnies just weren't there for the taking.

GBJ's loss, as much as it hurt our defense, turned our offense into 3 on 5 instead of our normal 4 on 5. The more WSU sagged towards the hoop, the more the Zags tried to go inside

Fouls weren't being called and baskets weren't being made. Is a change of plan in this instance necessary? I'm not a coach.

I do know, that whenever the brakes on my car get worn, I go to plan B and get them replaced!

Please note I did not say I trade the car in for a new one.

former1dog
03-29-2013, 12:37 PM
That isn't at all what I said. I'm not trying to at all to pretend it doesn't matter or isn't important. What I'm trying to say is that we need to look at this problem in its proper context. The point is that it isn't Coach Few doing something right when the other team doesn't make 3s, and doing something wrong when they do make 3s. Coach Few appears to have deliberately chosen a strategy of allowing a higher than normal amount of attempted 3s, and from the perspective of winning the highest percentage of games possible, this is likely the correct strategy (as evidenced by his overall winning pct). The downside is that this is a high variance strategy, and it leaves you prone to "upsets" when the other team is shooting particularly well. As such, this strategy may not be the best strategy when it comes to something like the NCAA tournament when you're knocked out with a single loss, while it's an excellent strategy to be done over the course of 30 some odd games (larger sample size = reduced variance due to luck/randomness).

Sorry, I must have had an Emily Litella (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Litella) moment. Carry on.

Hoopaholic
03-29-2013, 12:37 PM
haaaaa far from being thin skinned so not sure where that came in from left field.....but to each his own

WE DID make mid game adjustments, but had 3 defensive lapses and couple other mental errors, combined with poor shooting COST US THE GAME...not the defensive game plan....

but I do find it amazing that people complain that the sucessful SYSTEM should be altered...the system is built to predicate success and has CLEARLY demonstrated success

So people decide they want to game plan a defense AWAY from a teams strength (Wichita State strengths all year long were REBOUNDING and Attacking off the dribble, with strong inside presence)....their WEAKNESS ALL year long was shooting the three ball.....10% the game before us with wide open shots (PITT DARED them to shoot)

Yes the system in place allows for a team that can hit amazing shots consistently from long range to beat us......I statistically am happy with that "risk" .......I certainly am NOT one who wants to change an entire teams defensive philosophy simply because a small percentage of overall games we get beat by a team who becomes dynamic with three ball shooting....

former1dog
03-29-2013, 12:42 PM
Yes the system in place allows for a team that can hit amazing shots consistently from long range to beat us......I statistically am happy with that "risk" .......I certainly am NOT one who wants to change an entire teams defensive philosophy simply because a small percentage of overall games we get beat by a team who becomes dynamic with three ball shooting....

Well, I'm not. Because that statistically small percentage is remarkably when it counts the most. Capiche?

Exhibit A


Last game of the season for GU:

2013 WSU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2012 OHST shoots 38% from 3, making 9
2011 BYU shoots 50% from 3, making 14
2010 Syracuse shoots 48% from 3, making 12
2009 UNC shoots 58% from 3, making 11
2008 Davidson shoots 50% from 3, making 11

Zagnailler
03-29-2013, 12:42 PM
I think the Buckeyes will win, but what do I know? My bracket is on fire and not in a good way.

Ashes, ashes, all is ashes.

cbbfanatic
03-29-2013, 01:15 PM
Statistically, this is a perfect example of selection basis. Obviously we're going to be much more likely to lose when our opponent makes a bunch of 3s. As we've discussed in numerous threads here, 3s are streaky/random, and research suggests that defense has minimal impact on % of makes. Thus, when a team is hot from 3, it would be only logical that they're more likely to win than when they aren't. If you really want to do some statistical analysis, we're much better looking at overall trends, either just tourney games, or all games (or based on top 100 RPI, or whatever). My suspicion is that you'll find both for GU and for other teams a fairly solid correlation between opponent 3 point shooting % and opponent winning percentage.

can you show me this research? i am genuinely intrigued to take a look at it

webspinnre
03-29-2013, 01:28 PM
It's been linked numerous times on the board. I'll try and find it.

caduceus
03-29-2013, 01:30 PM
can you show me this research? i am genuinely intrigued to take a look at it

Here's a few from Ken Pomeroy:

Defense has little control over opponents’ 3P% (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/defense_has_little_control_over_opponents_3p)

“3-point defense” should not be defined by opponents’ 3P% (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/3_point_defense_should_not_be_defined_by_opponents _3p)

The Boeheim exception (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_boeheim_exception)

He's fleshed out a few more bits since these articles, in particular issues surrounding 2P defense that affect 3-point shot selection. At this point, his bottom line is:


The offense is largely in control of the quality of 3-point shots it takes.
These decisions are affected by the quality of the opposing 2P% defense
3P% is also influenced by effective challenging of shots.
All of that can add up to about a 3% swing from average.
So 3P% defense is not totally random
But a defense has considerably more direct impact on 2P% than 3P%.

former1dog
03-29-2013, 01:32 PM
Gonzaga ranked 338 out of 347 teams in Division 1 in NCAA BB Team Opponent Percent of Points from 3 Pointers in 2013.

http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/opponent-percent-of-points-from-3-pointers
Year - Rank
2012 - 210
2011 - 325
2010 - 231
2009 - 332
2008 - 276
2007 - 310
2006 - 252

So on and so forth

cbbfanatic
03-29-2013, 01:39 PM
Here's a few from Ken Pomeroy:

Defense has little control over opponents’ 3P% (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/defense_has_little_control_over_opponents_3p)

“3-point defense” should not be defined by opponents’ 3P% (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/3_point_defense_should_not_be_defined_by_opponents _3p)

The Boeheim exception (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_boeheim_exception)

He's fleshed out a few more bits since these articles, in particular issues surrounding 2P defense that affect 3-point shot selection. At this point, his bottom line is:


The offense is largely in control of the quality of 3-point shots it takes.
These decisions are affected by the quality of the opposing 2P% defense
3P% is also influenced by effective challenging of shots.
All of that can add up to about a 3% swing from average.
So 3P% defense is not totally random
But a defense has considerably more direct impact on 2P% than 3P%.


interesting and a little surprising, thanks. given the teams i follow most closely, it is hard to believe that the spread between good and bad is so tight -- interesting nonetheless.

i doubt, however, that any respectable coaches are saying in post game or practice "hey guys, don't worry about the 45% we're giving up from 3 during this 3 game losing streak, we just don't have any control over how many they make"

caduceus
03-29-2013, 04:30 PM
Gonzaga ranked 338 out of 347 teams in Division 1 in NCAA BB Team Opponent Percent of Points from 3 Pointers in 2013.

http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/opponent-percent-of-points-from-3-pointers
Year - Rank
2012 - 210
2011 - 325
2010 - 231
2009 - 332
2008 - 276
2007 - 310
2006 - 252

So on and so forth

Former, don't be fooled by these stats. The Zags were #22 out of 347 in defensive efficiency. Lower the number of made 2-point baskets (something that defenses can substantially control) significantly and suddenly your "percent of opponent's points from 3-pointers" magically goes up.

The Zags were #10 best in not giving up 2-point field goals for the year, and #34 best in opponent's effective field-goal shooting % (a stat which takes 3-pointers into account as worth 50% more than a 2-pointer).

webspinnre
03-29-2013, 04:48 PM
i doubt, however, that any respectable coaches are saying in post game or practice "hey guys, don't worry about the 45% we're giving up from 3 during this 3 game losing streak, we just don't have any control over how many they make"

Thing is, as long as they aren't literally let them shoot wide-open, they probably could be legitimately saying this. While defense may not affect 3 pt %, it can affect #s of 3 pt attempts.

NumberCruncher
03-29-2013, 05:09 PM
I worked up all of the 3ptr numbers for this season just to see if there were any unusual patterns.

Including the tourney, we had 24 D1 opponents.

Against us, they shot 33.0%. Against all other teams, they shot 34.8%. So, overall, we were better. However, that difference is not all that big and could be random variability.

But...

Splitting it up between in-conference and out-of-conference yields very different results.

WCC opponents shot 28.9% against us and 36.2% against all teams not named Gonzaga. That IS significant.

OOC opponents shot 37.0% against us and 34.1% against everyone else.


The difference is pretty stark and argues that it's easier for us to defend the three in conference than out of conference. This despite the fact that the WCC 3ptr percentage is well above the national average.

caduceus
03-29-2013, 05:57 PM
Splitting it up between in-conference and out-of-conference yields very different results.

WCC opponents shot 28.9% against us and 36.2% against all teams not named Gonzaga. That IS significant.

OOC opponents shot 37.0% against us and 34.1% against everyone else.


The difference is pretty stark and argues that it's easier for us to defend the three in conference than out of conference. This despite the fact that the WCC 3ptr percentage is well above the national average.

Interesting, thanks for doing that. I suppose there are several factors that could account for this. First, I don't think our defense really solidified until later in the season. Second, we know the WCC teams inside and out (as do they), having played each team 2 or more times a year (which I think helps defenses more so than offenses). Some of it is, of course, related to the level of competition -- and possibly skewed a bit facing two teams that were (situationally though not traditionally) hot-shooting from 3 in the tournament. It's tough to tease out the nitty gritty from the noise, for sure.

tyra
04-06-2013, 04:43 PM
Even after being defeated by Louisville, it is now clear that we were defeated by a very good team in WSU. No question in my mind.

Birddog
04-06-2013, 04:55 PM
Even after being defeated by Louisville, it is now clear that we were defeated by a very good team in WSU. No question in my mind.
WSU was the best team Zags played all season and they lost. No shame.

rijman
04-06-2013, 05:03 PM
WSU gave Louisville all they could handle and then some. They were a very good team playing as well as anyone in the NCAA tourney.

ZagLawGrad
04-06-2013, 05:07 PM
WSU was the best team Zags played all season and they lost. No shame.

No excuses. Zags should have beaten the Shockers.

Zagsker
04-07-2013, 06:14 AM
Even after being defeated by Louisville, it is now clear that we were defeated by a very good team in WSU. No question in my mind.

whatever helps you sleep better at night

Zagsker
04-07-2013, 06:17 AM
WSU was the best team Zags played all season and they lost. No shame.


ummm, there is a little shame

Birddog
04-07-2013, 09:25 AM
Why don't some of you posters that are so embittered call out the individual players that missed all those bunnies that contributed to one of the lowest (if not THE lowest) shooting percentages of the season. While you're at it call out the guys that missed their free throws and the three responsible for the screw ups in the final minutes. Go ahead and call out GBJ for not scoring in the first half and not being tough enough to play most of the second. And by all means, go ahead and name names of those responsible for letting WSU make those circus shots from "3" that nailed the coffin shut.

Jeeez, get over it. GU lost to a damn good team, one that was underseeded and obviously has some talent. They didn't play their best in a loser out format and they lost. Yeah it sucks, we get that.

kitzbuel
04-07-2013, 09:29 AM
WSU was the best team Zags played all season and they lost. No shame.

No excuses. Zags should have beaten the Shockers.



I agree with both, though I will say WSU was the best team at that time. We beat the team that lost to Creighton.

DADoZAG
04-07-2013, 09:38 AM
Congratulations to the pro and amateur Shockers for a fantastic season.

Haven’t read all the posts on the mbb, just wanted to post on the Shockers and this seemed like the best place.

Hope I’m not stepping on anyone’s posts when I say that there are several faces in that program that basketball fans will be seeing quite a bit of in the future, imo.

:clap:

Also great Coaching job by Pitino and his staff, used all their resources to win that game.

Go ZAGS!